Donations and a New Storage Server

Scintilla · Post by **Scintilla** » Sat Nov 01, 2008 12:22 pm

Bauzi wrote:I would apprecite a this donaters only feature:

Leaving an opinion on a video even without downloading it or without downloading from the local hosting.

Is there already something like that?

If a video doesn't have a local download (with the possible exception of Evanescence/Creed/Seether videos), then anyone can leave an opinion. It's only if a video has a local download that this requirement exists.

And I've been railing against the requirement for years. So it goes without saying that I would like to see this as a donators-only feature as well -- it's better than nothing.

Or, perhaps do it the other way around: make it a donators-only feature to allow people to leave ops on YOUR videos regardless of DL status. I'd take advantage of that in an instant.

CodeZTM · Post by **CodeZTM** » Sat Nov 01, 2008 12:47 pm

So. Uh.. How's the financial crisis going? I'd love an update.

Bauzi · Post by **Bauzi** » Sun Nov 02, 2008 4:30 am

Scintilla wrote: Or, perhaps do it the other way around: make it a donators-only feature to allow people to leave ops on YOUR videos regardless of DL status. I'd take advantage of that in an instant.

Nay. I wouldn´t like that. When I feel like giving an opinion and than figure out that I have to redownload a local copy I just doesn´t feel like it anymore, because it´s just a waste of time and internet ressources to download a video that I already have.

Or I apprecite it if people can give me ops regardless of the download status and if I can do it on every vid I want as donater.
Don´t give me the little finger. I always want the whole hand

JaddziaDax · Post by **JaddziaDax** » Sun Nov 02, 2008 4:42 am

or how about both ways

I like both ideas.

Scintilla · Post by **Scintilla** » Sun Nov 02, 2008 8:13 am

Bauzi wrote:
Scintilla wrote:Or, perhaps do it the other way around: make it a donators-only feature to allow people to leave ops on YOUR videos regardless of DL status. I'd take advantage of that in an instant.
Nay. I wouldn´t like that. When I feel like giving an opinion and than figure out that I have to redownload a local copy I just doesn´t feel like it anymore, because it´s just a waste of time and internet ressources to download a video that I already have.

Um, that's exactly why I supported your suggestion and offered mine as an alternative. Both of our suggestions have the same purpose; it's just a matter of who controls it.

(The biggest reason people give in support of the current rule is that it protects editors from receiving fraudulent opinions; people seem to like having that protection. Putting the option to waive the requirement in the hands of the editors themselves would address that issue.)

Bauzi · Post by **Bauzi** » Sun Nov 02, 2008 3:01 pm

I understand where it´s comeing from. I mean it´s damn easy to make a flame op with only ones just because you´re an ass, but it might take much more work to remove such an op.

Yeah I somehow like the protection, but sometimes don´t. Maybe the protection of the amvs should be a feature in general for donators.

BasharOfTheAges · Post by **BasharOfTheAges** » Sun Nov 02, 2008 4:03 pm

Scintilla wrote:(The biggest reason people give in support of the current rule is that it protects editors from receiving fraudulent opinions; people seem to like having that protection. Putting the option to waive the requirement in the hands of the editors themselves would address that issue.)

I don't think people like having the protection (you can always petition the mods to remove griefing-based Ops) - It's more like people like having a protection in place to slow down sockpuppeting all-10 ops and making fanbois have to put forth effort to all-10 this weeks' new great thing.

At least I always took the reasoning to be about the latter than the former because there has always been informal policy in place to deal with the former and it was implemented when people were constantly bitching about the latter.

JaddziaDax · Post by **JaddziaDax** » Sun Nov 02, 2008 5:00 pm

that or all 1 ops

YouTube · Post by **derobert** » Mon Nov 03, 2008 3:06 pm

BasharOfTheAges wrote:It's more like people like having a protection in place to slow down sockpuppeting all-10 ops

Hmmm, a $12 donation per sock puppet per year, we could run Org off that.

At least if we have enough socks.

This idea of letting donating sock puppets leave ops w/o downloading the video, I like it.

(Seriously, if its a donator-only feature, I doubt we have to worry about sock puppets and other random nonsense. $12 is a much higher barrier than downloading a video.)

Orwell · Post by **Orwell** » Mon Nov 03, 2008 3:46 pm

derobert wrote:
BasharOfTheAges wrote:It's more like people like having a protection in place to slow down sockpuppeting all-10 ops
Hmmm, a $12 donation per sock puppet per year, we could run Org off that. At least if we have enough socks.

This idea of letting donating sock puppets leave ops w/o downloading the video, I like it.

(Seriously, if its a donator-only feature, I doubt we have to worry about sock puppets and other random nonsense. $12 is a much higher barrier than downloading a video.)

Could this be tied to a cheaper tier, say $6 or even $3? I'd expect to see a lot more little donations, than the full $12 from anyone who hasn't already done so, I don't see this swaying them. And the member who's requestin the feature I believe already donates a fair amount, no?

Also a donation of $6 would allow you to download, say, 15 videos without staring them first, and $12 for 20 videos?